This is exactly what we need across the board. Believe it or not, but we have amazingly little data on the correlation between predicted and actual savings. Having the data to back up our claims is the foundation of a real market where energy efficiency can be valued as a resource in the utility space, private capital can play, insurance industry can guarantee savings.

The sooner we realize that the ONLY thing that maters is delivered real savings at the meter. Our current approach says, "you will save 20% Mr/Mrs homeowner," when what we really mean is that an average person will save 20%... meaning many (50%?) will save less than promised. When you combine this with a bias in our modeling for well understood reasons (like real people in temperate zones don't tend to use there thermostat the way our models think they do), tends to over-predict savings in the first place.

The current model for energy efficiency pushes this all on the homeowner, who is the LEAST able to manage and understand that risk. Getting real data on real savings will give us the ability change the paradigm and provide real and meaningful guarantees to consumers. We can make EE much more similar to Solar, which is booming based on the ability that has been developed through solar leasing and PPAs to give consumers a guarantee of savings with ZERO risk. Go figure... it works! Solar will double this year and there is something like $1B of private capital flowing into the ma

NEW YORK TIMESBy JULIE SATOWPublished: November 8, 2011

While the practice of retrofitting buildings with energy-conserving technology like efficient boilers, high-quality windows and compact fluorescent light bulbs has been around for years, data on whether these changes result in any real savings has been virtually nonexistent. Now, a new study shows that these relatively straightforward fixes can significantly reduce spending on fuel and electricity.

Deutsche Bank Americas Foundation, a philanthropic arm of the German bank, and Living Cities, a nonprofit partnership of 22 foundations and financial institutions, commissioned the report, which will be released later this month. It examined nearly 19,000 affordable housing units in New York City that had undergone energy efficiency retrofits and found that these changes resulted in a 19 percent savings on fuel bills and a 10 percent savings on electricity across the portfolio. This translates into $240 in fuel savings and $70 in electrical savings per apartment every year.

“We have been looking for the secret sauce,” said Ben Hecht, the president and chief executive of Living Cities. “This study is definitely the first foray into data, and that is going to be critical to convince owners and lenders of the importance of retrofitting buildings.”

At Terrific Tenements, for example, an 88-unit, two-building affordable housing complex on West 48th Street in Manhattan, the installation of new boilers and heating controls reduced fuel costs by 50 percent. At one of the buildings, at 425 West 48th Street, there was a fuel saving of $551 a year per apartment, while at the sister building at 527 West 47th Street, the saving was $355 annually for each unit.

“These buildings are prewar classics and are representative of a pretty broad swath of the city’s housing stock,” said Marc Zuluaga, a vice president and director of the multifamily energy services group at Steven Winter Associates, a building consultant in New York. The company, along with HR&A Advisors, an economic development and real estate consulting firm, conducted the study.

The retrofits at the Terrific Tenements “was not achieved with any particularly exotic technologies” like solar panels or a green roof, Mr. Zuluaga said. Rather, this is the simple story “of how an owner took the worst-performing building type in the city and turned it into one of the best-performing buildings in the entire city.”

Jeffrey I. Brodsky, the president of Related Management, an arm of the Related Companies, the landlord of Terrific Tenements, said: “This study proves that the assumption that you can’t rely on savings when doing a retrofit isn’t true. It may not be perfect or exact, but you will see savings.”

The company does energy audits on all of its New York City buildings, where building engineers examine the utility usages to expose any opportunity for increased efficiency and savings, he said.

Another project examined in the study is Riverview II in Yonkers, also owned by the Related Companies. The 343 apartments at Riverview, at 47 Riverdale Avenue, were heated with electricity, and the landlord was responsible for paying all of the tenants’ electrical bills. The Related Companies started an electrical savings program, including better windows, lighting upgrades and Energy Star refrigerators, that helped reduce overall electricity usage by more than 25 percent.

In addition, each apartment was responsible for paying its own electric bills, giving tenants an incentive to conserve electricity. As a result, the changes translated into $808 in annual savings for each apartment.

The study’s authors hope the results will go beyond persuading landlords to institute environmentally beneficial retrofits. They hope that lenders will use this data and consider underwriting larger loans to landlords based on the projected savings that come from retrofitting buildings.

Currently, lenders do not consider future savings from retrofits when they are underwriting a loan because there is little data indicating what those savings would be, experts said.

In addition to a lack of data, there is also some doubt whether energy audits, like those conducted by the Related Companies, are accurate. This is in part because some auditors are motivated to overstate the potential savings since favorable results help to justify the audits, and also because there is not sufficient follow-up to determine whether the energy audits were accurate.

To help resolve this, the study also created a tool for lenders to confirm the accuracy of energy audits. Using the data gathered, they divided New York City multifamily housing stock into categories based on a building’s age, heating system, electrical infrastructure and other factors.

Lenders can then apply the data gathered in the study to the building types to determine the potential savings and check the veracity of the energy audits. It also allows lenders to identify those buildings that would have the greatest increase in efficiency, and therefore the largest drop in costs, from an energy efficient retrofit.

Efficiency First Announces Jay Murdoch As Executive DirectorIndustry veteran selected to lead trade association of America’s home performance companies

November 3, 2011 – Efficiency First is happy to announce the selection of Jay Murdochas Executive Director.

Murdoch has been active as a member of Efficiency First – America’s home performance industry trade association – since the organization’s inception in 2009, both at a national level and through involvement in the Efficiency First Chapters in Michigan, New Jersey, and Maryland. He has a wealth of industry experience at all levels and from a variety of perspectives.

Murdoch most recently worked in Business Development for Masco Home Services and the company’s WellHome service offering, with its focus on home performance, as well as its Environments for Living offering, which focuses on energy and water efficient new homes. Prior to that, he has served in leadership roles at Owens Corning, the National Association of Home Builders, the NAHB Research Center, at the US Access Board (working on ADA design and construction guidelines), and as a remodeler and builder in the Washington DC metro area.

“We are thrilled to have Jay on board with Efficiency First, to bring our trade association and the home performance industry to the next level,” said Greg Thomas, Chair of the Efficiency First Board. “Jay knows our industry and our membership inside and out –from mom-and-pop home performance companies to Fortune 500 businesses. Jay understands how to attack the barriers that slow the growth of our industry, nationally and at the state and utility level.”

Murdoch said: “I see Efficiency First as a diverse family of job creating businesses – large and small companies, working in unison to drive meaningful and impactful energy efficiency policy, initiatives, and programs that meet marketplace and consumer needs. The powerful thing about this organization is the richness of its membership -- which is comprised of home performance contractors, energy auditors and HERS raters, insulation contractors, HVAC contractors, window and door contractors, weatherization organizations, real estate professionals, lending and financing companies, and building product and equipment manufacturers, suppliers and distributors – just to name a few.

“Equally impressive is that Efficiency First members push to impose on themselves high standards for work delivered in the homes and buildings of customers. It’s the humble home performance company who touches the homeowner every day, who is directly and materially affected by energy efficiency program rules and requirements, and who must execute these program designs in the field. In Efficiency First’s young existence, our members and our Efficiency First chapters have positioned themselves as key stakeholders who know what kinds of policies and programs can help scale the energy efficiency industry.

“This will be an exciting journey, and I am certain that in Washington DC, in state capitols, and at the county and city levels, Efficiency First members will be driving home the fact that energy efficiency is the really the “gift that keeps on giving” and brings with it a superior return on investment for customers, ratepayers and taxpayers. I feel fortunate that I will be part of this effort.”

The Efficiency First Board is also grateful to Kara Saul Rinaldi, who has served Efficiency First as Interim Managing Consultant since June and will continue on in her federal government affairs role for the organization.

Murdoch will be based in Efficiency First’s Washington DC metro area office.

Efficiency First is the trade association for America’s home performance industry – uniting home performance companies, building product manufacturers and related businesses and organizations in the escalating fight against global warming and rising energy costs.

Efficiency First represents its members in public policy discussions at the state and national levels, to promote the benefits of energy efficiency retrofitting and to help our companies grow do the industry can meet customers’ demand for quality residential energy improvements.

This a particularly interesting move, as it mirrors the policy of the CEC in California. They are currently requiring a 10% reduction in energy efficiency prior to solar for the Sonoma SCEIP Pace Program funded by them through ARRA dollars. My understanding is that it has had a significant impact on the use of that program, as solar installers move away from PACE towards solar leasing and other less restrictive private investment products.

As someone who longs believes in the loading order (EE before RE) it might seem strange that I have a problem with this sort of mandate. My issue is an attempt by bureaucrats to use regulation to force consumers to change behavior, rather than addressing the core reasons why people are not incentivized correctly to make these sorts of investments.

The reality is that for most consumers, Solar actually does make more sense. It is more reliable in terms of getting the outcomes that are promised in terms of delivered energy (vs. a much higher degree of variance for EE, especially in CA with its HERSII asset rating system that has a noted tendency to over-predict savings by a large degree). Mind you Solar also benefits from serious incentives in the form of a 30% off tax credit. But we should not penalize homeowners for our potentially unbalanced policies... we should rather focus on setting up a market that makes investing in the "correct" order a smart decision for homeowners to make. This approach detracts from solar, by forcing people to make an investment that in many cases is simply not in their financial interest.

I believe that at some point regulation will most likely be required to get to our goals. But if we have to regulate our early adopters to "do the right thing" we are in TROUBLE!

I would suggest we need to use carrots not sticks, and focus on changing the paradigm so that Energy Efficiency has the same sort of value proposition to consumers as Solar... take no risk and put up no money... and you can save. Then, when we achieve that and have hundreds of thousands of happy early adopters, then maybe we can start telling people that EE is such a good idea they have to do it.

Nine in 10 homes will have to spend more to qualify for solar subsidiesEnergy rating hurdle means 86% of householders would have to spend £5,600 to qualify for feed-in tariff

Some 86% of the UK’s homes do not meet the ‘C’ energy rating standard that properties will need to qualify for the feed-in tariff, research shows. Photograph: PANearly nine in 10 households would have to spend more than £5,000 to make their homes more energy efficient before they could be eligible for solar panel subsidies under new rules announced this week.

Under changes announced on Monday, the solar feed-in tariff (Fit) will be tied to the government's "green deal" loan scheme, that aims to make homes more energy efficient.

But 86% of the UK's homes do not meet the 'C' energy rating standard that properties will need to qualify for the feed-in tariff, according to research by the office of shadow energy minister, Caroline Flint.

Flint said: "These figures prove that the government is going to kill offsolar power as a popular energy saving measure available to the many and make it the preserve of a wealthy few. First they halved the tariff, then they add this energy rating hurdle putting the Fit beyond the reach of 86% of homes."

Homeowners should theoretically recoup the £5,600 – paid in repayments as part of the green deal – through energy bill savings, and will not need to foot the upfront cost. Anyone installing solar panels after 1 April 2012 will need to green their home to the 'C' standard, with those installing before 31 March 2013 getting 12 months' grace to install the measures. The green deal is due to come into effect in November 2012.

The news came as reports arrived of several solar projects already having been cancelled due to the feed-in tariff cuts, announced by Greg Barker on Monday.

FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) -- Stimulus money given to the California's energy sector is sitting unspent - and now the feds want their money back.

Part of California's federal stimulus money was supposed to help the state's energy sector by boosting renewable energy and weatherizing the homes of low income families.

By increasing demand, lots of jobs would be created.

But two-and-a-half years later, Robert Oglesby of the California Energy Commission says "There is still a large unexpended state energy program balance. About 64% of the funds remain in our account."

It was a stunning revelation at a Capitol hearing. About $131 million has not been spent on improving energy efficiency; another $21 million is languishing for weatherization.

And if it's not spent by next spring, the feds want the money back.

"For state departments and agencies to not have spent the money or have a plan to spend the money quickly by today is absolutely unacceptable and is offensive to the 12% of Californians that are still unemployed," St. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Los Angeles) said.

California's jobless rate has been among the highest in the country and stubbornly remains in double digit territory.

The Energy Commission blames bureaucracy for the hold up in job creation help.

The California Department of Education let about a million dollars in stimulus money lapse last year for the Child Nutrition Program. It would be frustrating for job seekers to see the same happen to the energy funds.